In the 2001–2002 season, there were eight television programs shooting digital. Eighty-four shows were shot on film. As demonstrated in the accompanying graph, as of October 22, 2003, the 2003–2004 season saw the number of shows shooting digitally ballooning to 39 (34 multi-camera sitcoms, three single-camera sitcoms and two one-hour programs). In television, digital is rapidly becoming the preferred medium over film and analog videotape.

Technology has often played a role in defining the roles and salaries of DGA members. As videotape began to be utilized extensively for multi-camera sitcoms in the 1970s, the Guild negotiated its first industry-wide live and tape television contract, the FLTTA (Freelance Live and Tape Television Agreement), which grew out of early network agreements covering live television. At that time, DGA members worked for significantly less money on dramatic videotape programs, than on film programs, even though they might have been performing essentially the same job duties as a member working on a film sitcom. In addition, the UPM role did not exist on taped programs.

In 1981, the Guild recognized the inherent danger of having such big differences in rates between associate directors and stage managers working on dramatic video programs and assistant directors working on film programs. The gap in salaries was narrowed in those negotiations, although real parity between the 1st stage manager and the 1st assistant director was never fully realized. The 2nd stage manager and 2nd AD were still treated quite differently and the unit production manager position was not covered at all under the videotape contract.

In the early 1990s, because of a growing and lucrative worldwide syndication market, producers began returning to film because of its sharper quality, longer storage life and ease of conversion to foreign broadcast formats. Film had always been the dominant medium for dramatic programs shot single-camera style but the new trend saw film overtake video as the medium of choice for multi-camera sitcoms as well.

In the late 1990s, another technological shift took place with the development of broadcast quality digital recording. Digital cameras gave filmmakers great creative flexibility and reduced costs for producers. Guild members and staff also knew that digital recording fell under the definitions of media covered by the FLTTA, so producers had every right to staff their shows based on the provisions of the FLTTA, as opposed to the Basic Agreement (BA). This was a cause for great concern, especially in the prime-time single-camera genre, where virtually every program had been shot on film and staffed under the BA. In multi-camera dramatic programming, it would have meant the return to a contract that eliminated at least one position (the UPM) and adversely affected the other categories in varying degrees.

By looking at the number of shows that have gone digital since 2001, it's easy to see that the "hit" Lewis referred to, in 2003 alone, would have resulted in 39 UPMs out of work and 34 key 2nds working a mere two or three days a week, and very few, if any, 2nd 2nds employed.

"If we didn't make these changes, members would be getting paid far less than they are getting paid now because these shows would have been covered under the FLTTA," Lewis said. "A person moving from film into digital now will experience a far less dramatic decrease in earnings, since contractually the production companies had the right to do that; in fact, they had started to do that. All digital shows — including single-camera and one-hour episodics — with the exception of features, would have taken a horrendous staffing and pay cut under FLTTA. All that would be covered today and in the future under the BA would have been feature films. We were able to protect DGA members because we were able to increase their salary and preserve staffing."

Still, some members who were previously working on film shows that were covered under the BA but who are now working on new digital shows covered by the blended agreement, have expressed concern about what they believe is a reduction in salary. This is not the case, explains Lewis. "If we didn't do the blended contract, members of the DGA team would not be getting the film rate on a digital show — they'd be getting the FLTTA rate — and that rate is much less than what they're getting today with the blended contract."

With the speedy acceleration of shows going the digital route, many who participated in the negotiations feel that if they hadn't acted when they did, there might be little hope now of reaching the same agreement from the AMPTP.

Single-camera television programs shot digitally also would have been under the terms of the FLTTA, had the ISA not been negotiated. In fact, this was the biggest gain of the ISA, even though it is probably the least mentioned. The FLTTA had not been designed to address single camera television and is silent or ambiguous on many key issues of great importance to DGA members — creative rights. The BA has extensive and explicit provisions protecting director's creative rights, from the right to consult on key elements of pre-production, production and post to a specified period in which to do a Director's Cut. All those provision could have been lost had the technological change not been addressed, including the Directors' right to choose the 1st AD in long form. The DGA Negotiating Team led the way for the other guilds, which only recently began looking at the impact of digital for their upcoming contract negotiations.

"We were very lucky that we had the backing of a very strong negotiating team led by Gil Cates," Lewis said. According to Lewis, Cates made it clear that the blended contract was number one on the DGA's list of demands and told the AMPTP negotiators that, "If we can't come to an agreement on that, we're not talking about anything else."

top of page

---

Table of Contents   |   Top of Page